-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
2024 Draft Thread
- Thread starter Mr T.
- Start date
As i said they would use them as a guide as they're industry standards. Thursfield wouldn't even make a deal over the phone before investigating into it as that would be nonsense. As i said they are used in negotiating some deals , but not all. THEY ARE THERE IN THE INDUSTRY AND WHEN IT COMES TO DEALS INVOLVING PICKS ONLY THEY CAN BE USED. Stop being argumentative and narrow minded.
Last edited:
Here are some live pick swaps last year:
Adelaide #8 (Curtin - 7 games) + #17 (#21 - Edwards - 0 games)
GWS #11 (#12 - Gothard - 0 games) + #15 (#18 - Wilson - 23 games) + #2024R2 (Adelaide) (-)
Essendon #10 (Caddy - 10 games)
Geelong #11 (O'Sullivan - 1 games) + #31 (#36 - Mannagh - 12 games)
GWS #17 (Leake - 0 games)
St Kilda #18 (Wilson - 23 games) + #2024R2 (Adelaide) (-)
Essendon gave up pick 36 to gain 1 spot, and the Saints gave up an F2 for the same.
Later we twice gained an F3 to move about 4 down around pick 40.
Adelaide #8 (Curtin - 7 games) + #17 (#21 - Edwards - 0 games)
GWS #11 (#12 - Gothard - 0 games) + #15 (#18 - Wilson - 23 games) + #2024R2 (Adelaide) (-)
Essendon #10 (Caddy - 10 games)
Geelong #11 (O'Sullivan - 1 games) + #31 (#36 - Mannagh - 12 games)
GWS #17 (Leake - 0 games)
St Kilda #18 (Wilson - 23 games) + #2024R2 (Adelaide) (-)
Essendon gave up pick 36 to gain 1 spot, and the Saints gave up an F2 for the same.
Later we twice gained an F3 to move about 4 down around pick 40.
That's what we were basically arguing over and i said it would never happen as it's *smile*.
F2 and 2 for iour 10 and 18. which was a proposal some poster made earlier. I said North would tell us to *smile* off . Thanks for making my point valid. Now @mrposhman is agreeing with you after he originally gave reasons for it. FMD people are like the Melbourne weather on here. lol
I think the haggle is whether they include pick 15 and get pick 1 instead.
Sounds good to me, We get 15, 16 & 21 for pick 1.
Nearly 100 extra points for us.
On 2nd thoughts we should go hard for 37 as well.
Then we would win the trade by about 500 points.
Thanks again as you've supported my original argument.I think the haggle is whether they include pick 15 and get pick 1 instead.
Sounds good to me, We get 15, 16 & 21 for pick 1.
Nearly 100 extra points for us.
On 2nd thoughts we should go hard for 37 as well.
Then we would win the trade by about 500 points.
When did I give reasons FOR that trade?
It wasn't going to happen.
Thursfield will look at all trade options for North but not what you are suggesting, he won't be going to check the points calculaor, but their draft board and who is likely to still be on the table,if its the players they are interested in they will make a call regardless of points value, ifs it not (again regardless of if they got a points win, then they wouldn't be doing it.
Hence points value means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO THEM, its which players would still likely be on the board and how much risk they are willing to take that the players they want go before those picks they are offered that matters to them.
Pretty sure he was the Tiger urine fella. Posts exactly like them
You said this in post 12,393. I never assumed anything, but just said it was outrageous based on points system, but you could see without the points system it was a farcical deal.
You make the assumption that there is nothing in it for North to trade back other than gaining points value for their Pick 2, which is incorrect.
Probably a blocked poster but is there someone suggesting they do check points?
Points are for a purpose, compensation picks, academy picks, Father sons etc. Every other deal is horse trading in the end
That the points system is absolute rubbish, and only useful for teams gaming the system to match bids on the cheap?
Hang on, so you think me saying that you using the points value index was incorrect was supporting the points value index. What are you talking about? I was pointing out that YOU were indicating that North needed a points gain to slide back, and I said that was incorrect and it certainly wouldn't be the basis for what Thursfield would decide a trade on, but you think thats me supporting it? Maybe you need to learn comprehension of the English language.
Pick two is a must, but it would prove to be very difficult to achieve. Our pick 6 & 10 are required.
No i said North were getting shafted and offered a negotiating deal. You put all the ifs and buts in as extras.
No, you said they were getting shafted due to the points value, indicating improve the points value and it would be ok. Lets remove 18 and use 2 picks in the mid 20's. Better points value, does that make it better for North? In your view of using the points value index then I guess yes, but for me (and the list managers) then I doubt it, as those picks would probably be AFTER the players that North are after, so who cares what the points value is, they simply don't care.
They will compare offers for 2, based on the player they want 1st (if thats Tauru) and what extra they might get out of it, and weigh that up against the risk of someone taking Tauru between 2 and 6. There is nothing else for them to consider other than do they think the upside of the extra pick is worth the risk they take on that the player they want (assume Tauru) is taken before their pick. I'd hazard a guess that they don't even take a glance at the points value index, they already know what they want from any deal to compensate for the extra risk they take on, rather than just taking Tauru at 2.
I hate to think what this thread is going to be like in another couple of weeks!
